What We're Measuring

What We're Measuring

curious trends: turf and grass in a steady state

Curious Trends: Turf and Grass in a Steady State

Explanation

The Turf and Grass class is an interesting case. When analyzing just the area of Connecticut covered by this class in any of the four dates of land cover, it appears that not much has changed. However, when viewing the actual changes on the maps, it is evident that the Turf and Grass class has seen some action. Why the discrepancy? It seems that turf and grass areas are being created at about the same rate they are being lost resulting in overall small changes between time periods, or the condition of a steady state. Generally, Turf and Grass was lost to development and other grasses. It is being gained from forest predominately and wetlands to a lesser extent.

Visit the examples below to see common conditions that result in the creation or loss of turf and grass. If you would like to become intimately familiar with the changes, visit the summary table.

Examples

Loss of Turf and Grass due to new store and parking lot (Manchester, CT)

Loss of Turf and Grass to new building (Mansfield, CT)

Change of Turf and Grass to Other Grasses because grass grows! (Windham, CT)

Loss of Other Grasses and Agriculture and Gain of Turf and Grass as New Homes and Lawns are Built (South Windsor/Vernon, CT)

New Golf Course Results in Loss of Other Grasses and Agriculture and Gain of Turf and Grass (East Haddam, CT)

Summary Table of Turf and Grass Gains and Losses

Take Home Message. Significant changes have occurred in the turf and grass class. Substantial turf and grass area has been converted to both developed and other grasses and agriculture as well as, to a lesser extent, barren. At the same time, a substantial amount of forest and wetland has been converted to turf and grass.

Gains and Losses of Turf and Grass in Connecticut for each time period below. All values are in acres.
	1985-1990			1990-1995			1995-2002
	change from turf & grass	change to turf & grass	Net gain or loss	change from turf & grass	change to turf & grass	Net gain or loss	change from turf & grass	change to turf & grass	Net gain or loss
Developed	1897	6	-1891	581	0	-581	828	828	-827
Turf and Grass	138494	138494		139934	139934		140324	140324
Other Grasses	1432	826	-606	647	282	-365	1154	375	-779
Forest*	229	1820	1590	65	1926	1861	16	1791	1775
Water	211	8	-203	55	10	-46	101	29	-72
Wetland**	10	267	258	20	263	243	29	98	69
Barren	252	141	-110	76	25	-51	96	35	-61
TOTAL	142525	141563	-962	141378	142400	1062	142548	142652	104

* Deciduous forest and coniferous forest have been combined.
** Non-forested wetlands, forested wetlands and tidal wetlands have been combined.

First Column "1985-1990 change to turf and grass". The area, in acres, that was turf and grass in 1985 (or the first date in the time period) and changed to a different landcover by 1990 (or the second date). The different landcover coincides with the landcover class in the first column.

Second Column "1985-1990 change to turf and grass". The area, in acres, that was something other than turf and grass (as indicated by the class in the left column) in 1985 (or the first date) and changed to turf and grass by 1990 (or the second date).

Net gain or loss = red (negative). More turf and grass was lost to a class than was gained from that class. For example, between 1985 and 1990, 1897 acres was changed from turf and grass to developed compared to only 6 acres changing from developed to turf and grass resulting in a net loss of turf and grass.

Net gain or loss = black (positive). More turf and grass was gained from a class than was lost to that class. For example, between 1985 and 1990,only 229 acres were changed from turf and grass to forest compared to a whopping 1820 acres that went from forest to turf and grass resulting in a net increase of turf and grass.

Do you see a trend that we haven't mentioned? Email us. We'd like to know about it.